Bouncers at school to block entry of students reprehensible: HC pulls up DPS Dwarka amid fee hike row
The court also reiterated that a school “cannot be equated with a purely commercial establishment” as a school is “rooted not in profit maximisation but in public welfare, nation building and the holistic development of children.”
Written by Sohini Ghosh
New Delhi | June 5, 2025 07:23 PM IST
3 min read
Whatsapp
twitter
Facebook
Reddit
Disposing of the application, the High Court emphasised that the parents concerned “are obliged to adhere and comply with the orders passed by this Court as regards payment of requisite fees to the school.” (File)
A reprehensible practice like deploying bouncers to block entry of students has no place in an institute of learning, the Delhi High Court said on Thursday as it pulled up DPS Dwarka for disregarding the dignity of a child, and expressed “dismay” amid a row over the fee hike issue. “Public shaming or intimidation of a student on account of financial default, especially through force or coercive action, not only constitutes mental harassment but also undermines the psychological well-being and self-worth of a child,” the High Court underlined.
Justice Sachin Datta recorded the observations in a verdict while deciding an application moved by parents of 32 students who were expelled by the school over non-payment of pending dues.
Noting that DPS Dwarka had subsequently withdrawn the expulsion order and had reinstated the students, making the application moot, the court observed, “This court is also constrained to express its dismay at the alleged conduct of the petitioner school in engaging bouncers to physically block entry of certain students into the school premises.”
“Such a reprehensible practice has no place in an institute of learning. It reflects not only disregard to the dignity of a child but also a fundamental misunderstanding of a school’s role in society. The use of bouncers fosters a climate of fear, humiliation and exclusion that is incompatible with the fundamental ethos of a school,” the court underlined.
The court also reiterated that a school “cannot be equated with a purely commercial establishment” as a school is “rooted not in profit maximisation but in public welfare, nation building and the holistic development of children.”
“The primary objective of a school is to impart education and inculcate values, not to operate as a business enterprise…The school, no doubt, is entitled to charge appropriate fees, especially given the financial outlay required to sustain infrastructure, remunerate staff and provide a conducive learning environment. However, the school is different from a normal commercial establishment, since it carries with it fiduciary and moral responsibilities towards its students,” the court recorded.
The bench further underlined that in case the school decides to take any action in future under Rule 35 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, which deals with striking off of students from the school’s roll, it will issue a prior communication – specifically putting the students concerned or their parents or guardians to notice — as to the date on which the students are proposed to be struck off the rolls. The school is bound to give a reasonable opportunity to show cause against such action, the court said.
Story continues below this ad
Disposing of the application, the High Court emphasised that the parents concerned “are obliged to adhere and comply with the orders passed by this Court as regards payment of requisite fees to the school.”
Earlier on May 16, the High Court, observing that there is no embargo on schools hiking fees, had directed DPS Dwarka to allow the 102 students, whose parents had moved the court against the fee hike, to continue their studies, provided they deposit 50% of the hiked school fee for the 2024-25 academic year.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More